Re: Why were Murderers Row ducked so much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CutMeMick
I just don't see the "greatness" in him...
Correct me if I'm missing any but he defeated: Zivic, Cocoa Kid, Holman & Moore.
On a lower level: Billy Smith, Lytell, Chase & Wade.
Out of that bunch Moore & Zivic are the only I can without a doubt say they are great.
Cocoa Kid has a solid arguement on it. The rest no...
Interesting. I think he's in the top 5 middleweights that ever lived. Based on the footage I have been able to watch and what I have read by many accomplished historians.
He's a perfect example of why records need to be scrutinized. In some cases they are full of "names" but short on quality because of when those names appear.
In Burleys case he has a shortage of recognizable names because nobody would fight him. Not just the white establishment either. Its why he and the rest of the row had to fight each other. Just like Moore he probably fought his fellow crew about 20 or more times. Moore was the only one to have broken out of obscurity and it took him 160 fights to do it.
Re: Why were Murderers Row ducked so much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CutMeMick
I just don't see the "greatness" in him...
Correct me if I'm missing any but he defeated: Zivic, Cocoa Kid, Holman & Moore.
On a lower level: Billy Smith, Lytell, Chase & Wade.
Out of that bunch Moore & Zivic are the only I can without a doubt say they are great.
Cocoa Kid has a solid arguement on it. The rest no...
Well Cocoa was in murderers row.
I heard about 3 of them as individuals and though they were ok. Then I found out they were a group type thing.
If I'm honest I've yet to see or hear anything that solidifies them as very good fighters.
Excluding Burley, as its obvious to see his skill set.
Re: Why were Murderers Row ducked so much?
Actually, the question is the answer!